Women

1
Womens Commission for Refugee Women and
Children Making Reproductive Health a Priority
for Refugee Women and ChildrenBixby Program in
Population and Reproductive Health, UCLA School
of Public Health18 October 2005
2
Four program areas Detention and Asylum
(U.S.) Children and Adolescents
Protection and Participation Reproductive
Health
3
Detention and Asylum (I)
4
Detention and Asylum (II)
5
Detention and Asylum (III)
6
Children and Adolescents (I)
7
Children and Adolescents (II)
8
Protection and Participation (I)
9
Protection and Participation (II)
10
Reproductive Health(I)
11
Reproductive Health(II)
12
Reproductive Health(III)
13
Reproductive Health(IV)
14
Reproductive Health(V)
15
Reproductive Health(VI)
16
Reproductive Health(VII)
17
Inter-agency Global 10-Year Evaluation of
Reproductive Health (RH) Services for Refugees
and Internally Displaced Populations
(IDPs) Initiated in October 2002 Final
report published November 2004
18
Overall Objective

• To evaluate the provision of RH services to
  refugees and IDPs, based on the framework for
  implementation outlined in the Inter-agency Field
  Manual

19
Inter-agency Global Evaluation of RH Services for
Refugees and IDPs

• Component 2 Evaluation of Coverage of RH
  Services for Refugees and IDPs
• Heilbrunn Department of Population and Family
  Health
• Mailman School of Public Health
• Columbia University

20
Purpose

• Determine current situation regarding
  availability of RH services to conflict-affected
  populations
• Identify the gaps in service provision

21
Methodology

• List of countries and displaced populations
  compiled.
• Countries with a minimum of 10,000 refugees or
  IDPs included.
• OECD countries excluded.
• Key informants identified in each country.
• Data collection March May 2003.
• Data analysis with EpiInfo 2002.

22
Results

• Distributed in 73 countries
• 188 questionnaires from 33 countries in Asia,
  Africa, Latin America received
• Represents 8.5 million people

23

• Availability of the following services was
  investigated
• Family planning
• Safe motherhood, including emergency obstetric
  care
• STI/HIV/AIDS
• Sexual and gender based violence
• Cross-cutting needs of adolescents

24
Proportion of sites where Safe Motherhood is
available
25
Proportion of sites where FP is available
26
Proportion of sites where STI/HIV/AIDS services
are available
27
Proportion of sites where GBV services are
available
28
Limitations

• Limited to sites where key informant took time to
  respond.
• Primarily refugees (82) in camps (76).
• Assessed only availability, not quality, detailed
  accessibility or usage.
• Yes/No questions could have been interpreted
  differently.
• Info on IDPs more difficult to get.
• Population numbers differed between reported and
  key informants on the ground.

29
Discussion

• Coverage of RH appears fairly good.
• Coverage decreases with the newness of the
  technical area
• GBV newest, least familiar, lowest coverage
• ANC most standard, highest coverage.
• HIV/AIDS, EmOC could (and should) be better.

30
Conclusion

• Given RHR in 1993, results are promising
• Even if overestimation, wide range and meaningful
  number of sites provide RH services
• BUT
• Experience shows that attention must be
  maintained and
• Recommend updating this database regularly.